First thread so sorry if this is in the wrong place…
Anyhoo… my latest source of anger is the Clarkson/Stig spatt that’s been in the news. Poor old Mr C feels hurt and betrayed by the book Ben Collins and the BEEB taking him to court to prevent its publication. WHY??? Clarkson makes 2million a year from Top Gear according to my admittedly brief internet research… 2 mil for being a loud mouth twatt 90% of the time! But apart from that JC makes more money bringing out his stupid DVD’s every Xmas so kids with no imagination have something to buy for their dads!
People say… people say that B.C. has ‘ruined’ the mystic behind the Stig… but why… anyone who has the inclination and the internet has known who he is for ages and even if you didn’t know, it’s hadly going to make the experience of someone in a crash helmet driving really fast any worse! I mean when I was a kid and I found out that it was my dad (or sometimes my mum) who left prezzies at the bottom of my bed, not Father Christmas, it didn’t ‘ruin’ the Christmas experience!! I didn’t feel the need to sue my parents!
More to the point, unlike JC BC may actually have something interesting to say about the cars he’s driven… some near death stories and such like. He may even describe these experiences in terms other than… POWER!!! FASTER!!! What about the celebs he’s taught the track to…any inside goss, who was rubbish who was terrifying? WE DESERVE TO KNOW!!
Finally who else could have written this book… the answer surely is no one. He was the Stig for 7yrs not JC or the rest of them. He’s not stealing ‘interlectual property’ from the BBC he’s just writing about his own experiences. It’s not the same as trying to sell a Stig’s Choice CD or Stig Dolls… it’s his own interlectual property.
It’s like going up to a really big-eyed, excited kid on Christmas morning and saying, “Hey, just so you know, Santa Claus isn’t real and it’s all your parents. They had the cookies with some beer and a TV marathon after you went to bed.”
Maybe not that extreme, but come on. The Stig is the Stig. It’s way more fun when nobody knows who he is.
Boyo Jim - recognizing Top Gear is the first step. The Stig is the driver on TG, and he has always been (on the show) a mystery. Clarkson is one of the hosts of the show. Beyond that, this is the first I’ve heard of the news stories, but I still am going to comment.
The Stig may be being sued not because he has interesting things to say, but because the deal was to be a mystery, such as Otara pointed out. If someone wants to find out who he is on the internet through rumors and unconfirmed accounts, that is fine. For him to say, “Well, I was hired to do this anonymously, but I’m going to make sure I don’t.” Of course, I have watched the show for a long time (around a year or so) and never once thought to look up who the Stig was. I also never worried about it. The Stig is a character, and supposed to be a mystery. That made perfect sense. I always assumed they would do a reveal at some point, but not through courts and news summaries.
Did he wear a mask? Was he never seen on camera? I have no idea who tests the products for Consumer Reports either – I’m sure there are many testers – but it’s kind of the nature of the beast. Their results are distilled in a a final product report.
It’s nothing to do with intellectual property. It’s about making an agreement and then keeping your word. He agreed to a confidentiality agreement when he took the job. He then ignored it when it became convenient (read: profitable) for him.
He always wore a helmet and a full racing jumpsuit (both white) on camera, including some times when it was absurd for him to do so. For instance, in one episode he was briefly seen lounging by a hotel pool wearing the helmet and the jumpsuit; a woman was swimming, wearing a bikini and a white helmet that matched the Stig’s. And he never spoke.
yeah… Basically the Stig is a character who drives the (usually very fast and expensive) cars around the shows own race track, he also teaches the track to the ‘celebs’ that come on the show each week. Since he never takes his crash helmet off we never know who he is and the presenters make much of his alledged qualities… ‘he sleeps like a bat… his issue glows in the dark’ that kinda thing. He, or should I say the show, also has a range of stuff for sale.
As i said in the op, if the guy who plays the Stig had tried to capitalise on this stuff I’d have little sympathy, but as far as I can see he was just writing a book about his own personal experiences. If this ruins things for wide eyed kids or adults with little curiosity then so be it (imo). I honestly think that their mental hurt or whatever the lawers would have said if this whole thing had happened in the USA as opposed to here, is less important than someones right to tell their own story… not to mention make a few quid.
It is a little more than that - I think the anonymity really is important to the character.
When the Stig tested a car, the result was pretty much beyond contest - the running gag made him a sort of robot for measuring car performance. Fans of specific marques couldn’t claim that their special favorite was unfairly treated because the driver used to race for the competitor or had no experience with this sort of vehicle due to his racing history or whatnot. It’s the Stig - he operates beyond human limitations. Sure, it’s an illusion, but it worked.
Having a name and a resume associated with the Stig makes the character much less effective. We can’t maintain the charade of infallibility, it’s just a guy driving fast.
Yes, I take this show way too seriously. And I don’t even like cars.
Let’s look at this from another possible perspective… The person who plays the Stig asks the BBC if he can write a book (perhaps, and there is no real reason why B.C. would feel the need to out himself) anonomously. They refuse for whatever reason, maybe because wide eyed kids will cry themselves to sleep. If you’d spent 7yrs of your life being the Stig wouldn’t you feel a bit annoyed?
